Changes between Version 6 and Version 7 of projects/leadership-committee/process
- Timestamp:
- Nov 16, 2011, 6:28:29 PM (12 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
projects/leadership-committee/process
v6 v7 13 13 * Infrastructure: what areas to focus on, what technologies to use, what and when to buy new equipment 14 14 * Collaboration: within the given political direction, what coalitions to join, what conferences to attend, what to present, etc. 15 * Message/Communication: how and what to communicate with mem ers15 * Message/Communication: how and what to communicate with members 16 16 * Staffing: who/when to recruit or hire for staff 17 18 HG: other recent decisions made about membership dues and limits, deadlines for payments and processes for removing non paying members. 19 utilizing new accounting software 17 20 18 21 === Timing === … … 21 24 22 25 Direction is long term. Infrastructure, Collaboration, Message/Communication and, at times Staffing, can be opportunity based and more time-sensitive. 26 27 HG: weekly staff meetings are where issues are discussed and decisions made. many issues are tabled for future meetings, but decisions are made on a weekly basis. These meetings include staff, co directors, sometimes support team members and other lc members who do a lot of work with MF/PL. Whether these meetings are open to more involvement/participation is a question to consider. 23 28 24 29 === Scope === … … 47 52 followed up on? 48 53 54 HG: we've started taking notes of the weekly staff meetings which are now public. notes from LC meetings I believe are also posted online. 55 49 56 === Consultations === 50 57 Outside of the people actually making the decisions, who else is … … 54 61 === Assessment === 55 62 What have the benefits of the decision-making process to date been? What have the drawbacks been? 63 64 HG: what I see as an important clarification is to decide what decisions should be made by staff, directors, lc and support team. for example - some sample ideas: should there be an approval process for equipments charges of a certain amount; conference requests; new member requests; when tech upgrades are needed; etc. at what point can working groups have autonomy over operations and what decisions need larger leadership review? I think that's the critical question.